In Texas, where early voting for the Nov. 5 elections started on Monday, the state’s controversial photo ID law is being enforced for the first time as citizens cast their ballots. In 2012, the Department of Justice found that the law discriminated against minorities and low-income voters in the state — now there’s growing concern that it places an unnecessary burden on women. Name changes that may have come as a result of marriage or divorce, reportssay, may cause problems at the polls.

On Tuesday, a local television station ran a story about a judge who faced an issue at the voting booth. “What I have used for voter registration and for identification for the last 52 years was not sufficient yesterday when I went to vote,” 117th District Court Judge Sandra Watts told Kiii News of South Texas. She had to sign an affidavit affirming her identity in order to vote because the last name on her voter registration card, her maiden name, didn’t match the last name on her license. “This is the first time I have ever had a problem voting,” she said.

State officials say the issue, however, may not cause as many problems as the reports suggest. “We want to be very careful not to cause false alarm,” Alicia Pierce, a spokesperson for the Texas Secretary of State’s office, told TIME. “We’ve worked very closely with poll workers to create the right forms and the right training to make sure this isn’t an issue at the polls.”

Though the law requires that names on both the identification card and the voter registration card be “substantially similar,” if a person’s name doesn’t match exactly they will still have an opportunity to vote. In that case, voters are required to sign an affidavit affirming they are who they claim, which is then noted in the poll book.

A “substantially similar” name, Pierce says, could include a nickname, a maiden name, and or suffix such as “junior.” If the poll worker finds that the name is dissimilar, a voter can file a provisional ballot and present updated information within six days of the election.

“In a perfect world, you would update your voter registration card regularly to match any identification that you plan to use,” Pierce said.

However, Linda Krefting, the President of the League of Women Voters of Texas says they would rather the voter ID law had not been passed in the first place. “We would rather have ended at preclearance,” Krefting told TIME. “But, since it is the law, the rights of voters are best protected if people understand what the law requires, what photo IDs are acceptable, and how to get them.”

There are seven acceptable forms of identification accepted in Texas, including a state-issued driver’s license, handgun license or identification card, military ID cards, citizenship cards, passports, and the Texas Election Identification Certificate, a free ID card distributed by the Department of Public Safety that can be used to vote.

The state has implemented extended hours and deployed mobile units to make getting election ID easier. Yet, as of last week, just 41 people across the state had been issued with the cards, the Dallas Morning News reports. An estimated 1.4 million eligible voters in the state do not have the proper IDs to vote.

Voters could run into difficulties if they try to obtain the necessary cards and can’t produce documents with their current name — a problem that may not be confined to the Lone Star State. There is a significant gap in the possession of documents proving citizenship between men and women, with only 66% of women reporting that they have the documents on hand with their current name, according to a 2006 survey sponsored by New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice. Documents include birth certificates, passports, and citizenship papers.

“The real issues would not be going on at the polls,” Krefting said.

In Pennsylvania, where a strict photo ID law was passed but had not been implemented, a woman joined the American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit against the state for that very reason. Joyce Block, according to the ACLU of Pennsylvania’s website, had never driven and didn’t have a state-issued ID, but when she went to get an ID in 2012 she was told she couldn’t because her birth certificate and her Social Security card were in her maiden name. The only official document she had with her married name on it was her ketubah, the marriage certificate she had received during her traditional Jewish wedding ceremony. Because it was written in Hebrew, a DMV official couldn’t verify it.

In 2011, the Chattanooga Times Free Pressreported that an elderly woman was denied a photo ID card for the same reason; though she presented a birth certificate, a rent receipt, a voter registration card, and a copy of her lease, she was denied a photo voter card because the names didn’t match up. The woman, officials said, should have presented a marriage certificate.

“A full 34% of women don’t have documents proving citizenship with their current name on it,” Wendy Weiser, director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center told TIME. “Why do we have such strict limitations on what kinds of documents people can have when they need to vote?”

Transgender men and women, on the other hand, may face even tougher battles. According to the Williams Institute at the University of California School of Law, 29% of transgender men and women in states where strict photo ID laws are in place do not have IDs that reflect the gender they present. In Texas, 27% of the transgender population does not have accurate identification.

Katy Stewart, the executive director of the Transgender Education Network of Texas, told TIME that though she’s concerned that fear of what happens when trans people hit the polls will discourage voting, she’s encouraging people to double check their information and vote early to avoid problems. “This voter ID was defeated and it has come back, it feels like we’re getting beat up again,” Stewart said. “But it looks like its something that’s going to stay, so what we’re going to have to do is prepare people to get past that fear and have what they need to vote.”

As a US born and bred citizen I never expected voter suppression to impact me directly. But when I went to apply for a Texas drivers license, I couldn't prove my name was Judy Hogan even though it appeared on my Washington state drivers license, credit cards, insurance cards, social security card, WA voter ID, and hands full of other cards with my name on them. The Texas Gestapo instead insisted on putting my maiden name (the one on my birth certificate- the only court produced document I had) on the new license even though no one knows me by that name, and my voter ID has Judy Hogan on it. So now my only picture ID has a name on it that does not match my voter ID. I cannot vote in Texas until I can produce a court document that states my name as Judith Hogan. In fact, I will have problems traveling when my tickets, my medic alert card, and any other of my various IDs don't match the drivers license.

This just puts me in a fighting mood y'all. This is my big Texas welcome. Thanks a bunch to the knuckle draggers who thought this one up. Wendy Davis here I come!

"[The] Department of Justice found that the law discriminated against minorities and low-income voters in the state"

I keep seeing that in reports like this one; but it does not make sense.

Getting copies of lost documents can cost upwards of $100.00, and so hurts the low-income citizens; but these documents are needed for many other things than just voting (like getting a job, driving, opening a bank account, etc.).

And if they are not needed to vote, how many times would you like me to vote for my candidate of choice?

The in-line link explains how this hurts minorities: "Hispanics disproportionately lack either a driver’s license or a personal identification card." Last time I checked with logic and reason, that means Hispanic culture, not the law, creates the problem.

But the wording is clearly intended to suggest that the law seeks to prevent non-whites from voting, and the comments underscore that this is the impression left with many readers.

Horse hockey!

Getting an ID is no more, or less, difficult based upon one's race-- or gender, or sexual preference, or religion, or planet of birth...

This is talking points masquerading as "news." Talking points can lie all they want to, but I expect reporting to be honest. Silly me.

Why doesn't the USA make every citizen register for a national identity card if you are going to make them produce identification for one of our most profound freedoms as a citizen? We could all have our private lives in a national database. We could make it a crime not to carry it and if a policeman says, "let me see your NIC" and you don't have the card, you go to jail.

We already have a solution for this - your social security number is your "government name", not a password. Stop using it as a password, and tattoo it on your forehead (or maybe just start printing it on photo IDs), since it doesn't change even if a given name does.)

Did you know that it is perfectly legal for a married woman to use either her maiden name OR her husband's name, and it is legal for her to use her maiden name on some documents and her married name on others? It is not unusual for married women to use their maiden names in their professional lives, and their husbands' names socially. This was the traditional way for many years, and many mature women continue to do it. It is also legal for a divorced woman to use her maiden name or her married name, as she chooses. Also if the FIRST name and the ADDRESS on the picture ID is the same as the ones on the voter list--what are the odds that 2 people with the same first name live at the same address and that one is trying to steal the other's vote? Its absurd, and obviously an attempt at voter suppression.

Republicans cannot win a fair election in many cases, because their policies do not benefit the majority of the voters. Rather than change their policies, they pass laws to prevent certain demographics from voting, or make it more difficult. In Texas there is a Democratic woman candidate who is very popular with female voters, who are more likely to vote Democratic in any case, so Republicans passed this new law to suppress the female vote. If voter fraud were truly the issue, student IDs would be allowed as would any document that reasonably indicates a voter's identity, such as a utility bill, rent receipt, or any picture ID.

The purpose of an ID is to verify a person's identity. So if the poll workers know the identity of the voter--as in the case of the judge who tried to vote IN HER OWN COURTHOUSE--and still waste her time with this kind of nonsense, then clearly the intention is to suppress the vote, rather than prevent voter fraud. And regardless of the intent, if the policy effectively disenfranchises a voter, it's still unacceptable.

I am a notary. The law requires that prior to notarizing a legal document, the signer presents a state- or government-issued current, valid photo identification. And that the name on the i.d. must match the name on the document to be signed. So without this, none of these people mentioned above can purchase property, have a power of attorney, sign an affidavit, transfer property that they own into a trust, or any number of legal actions that they might urgently need to take. Ok, it CAN be done but it's a pain and some notaries won't do it. As mentioned, the state i.d. is FREE. Why not take advantage of it and save yourself the pain and possible huge costs of not having i.d.?

Maybe this country needs to reform the way we run our identification process. It really shouldn't be that difficult for everybody to have an identification that shows their correct name on it and we shouldn't need to jump through hoops to get it. I do think that everyone should have an identification card on them for their own sakes, I don't think thats asking too much

Brilliant, really. I can remember at college in 1976 seeing a small table of Young Republicans in the student union. I stopped and chatted with them. Really nice people, I thought, but they want to rule not govern. They're not really interested in an exchange of ideas. Okay, that's cool. Had no idea that years later, they would move to literally establish systems and laws that could disenfranchise the majority of those voting. It takes me a while sometimes. So a woman (after showing her ID, where her names are in the wrong columns) has to sign an extra affidavit swearing she is who she says she is in order to vote and that affidavit is recorded in a pollbook, then that sets up a process whereby if someone doesn't like the way an election turns out, then what's to stop contesting all those affidavit votes? It would be really easy. Just get the pollbook. Yes lets tie up elections in court trying to determine the outcome. Where this leads is not only gridlock in Washington, but potentially throughout the country. Really USA?

What a load of nonsense. Quit trying to stir up problems that are non-existant..

If I don't have my voter card, my driver's license works nicely. I can also use my passport as identification. I'm a woman in Texas and I think this new ID to vote law is terrific. No more people with 5 aliases voting, no more dead people voting, etc. The law certainly won't hinder me in any way from voting. Getting my fanny to the polling place in time and in spite of Houston traffic is about the only hinderances. I also thought that, as in some countries where low-tech is prevalent, dipping one finger into permanent ink after voting is a fantastic idea as well. Personally, I'm for it if it stops voting fraud.

If I don't get my name to match my driver's license, that's my own fault. I'll pay the penalty for that error by not voting and then get the card updated so I can move forward.

Time -- we already have enough problems with our government that need to be addressed. Women, a voter card and ID requirements in Texas aren't one of them. Shame on you for such promotion.

When you can't win legally disenfranchise as many voters as possible. The GOP way. Democracy and freedom mean nothing in their quest to obtain and maintain power. Any third world dictator would be proud of their actions.

According to the Dallas morning news article - Few Texas voter-fraud cases would have been prevented by photo ID law, review shows. 66 people have been brought up on charges of voting irregularities since 2004. Only four cases involved someone illegally casting a ballot at a polling place where a picture ID would have prevented it. Clearly the only reason to have this law is to prevent people from voting who should be allowed to vote.

Why is a certain ID acceptable and others not? Because it's more likely to disenfranchise a specifically targeted demographic - for instance, a student ID versus a carry permit. The law has been specifically designed to exclude certain segments of the population. Is not driving a 'cultural problem' as you suggest? Only if you want to vote, it would seem. if the requirement was to produce a notarized document in Spanish or to be on a congregation list at a Catholic diocese (if such a thing exists), would your Anglican culture be the problem?

They aren't in Texas. Early voting is still a priority, rest assured. Hard for the nation to stare at Texas from afar and figure out what is ACTUALLY going on there. The imagination can quickly run away from the facts.

@NithinCare2 Hate to yell ya this, but Democrats have no chance at Texas for ANY future, with or without illegal and unconstitutional federal "help." TEXANS don't want a Nanny State government to "take care" of them.

@kauaidyes I'm sorry, I'm pretty sure your confused and meant to say Democrats. Why else are they pushing so hard this "VOTER SUPRESSION!!!" bs as well as targeting "Undocumented Workers" with their political strategy. Fortunately for them, its going to backfire. Over 70% of Hispanics support the abortion restrictions put in place in Texas. The numbers are about the same for women as well. Trust me, when the Democrats lose, it won't be because of this fabled "VOTER SUPRESSION!!!"

But I'll play your game. I think it should be illegal to ask for ID at the voting booths, because its your right to vote! And much to the same degree, it should be illegal to ask for ID when selling a firearm, because its your right to bear arms!

@kauaidyes I agree with you. I live in Texas and I'm tired of the social conservatives controlling our State. I am a huge Wendy Davis supporter and the laws they just passed have been proven to limit the amount of women who can vote, as well as Minorities.

@califmom The state ID is free.... IF you have the REQUIRED documents which are almost never free. Many people don't have birth certificates, and many areas have lost huge amounts of documentation die to fires in record keeping offices, making it nearly impossible for many Americans born before computers to get a proper ID. Not everyone drives. Not everyone owns real property. Not everyone is like you.

@califmom It is not free if you don't have your birth certificate and other documents handy and you have to order them. Not an easy feat for the poorest who already have to decide between gas for the car or food for the table.

Or, or...how bout we talk about what really are the problems with the law...showing my ID is far down on the list of probelms I have with this law. This law disenfranchise voters by eliminating or reducing early voting (meaning only hours to vote are during work hours, in which poor people cannot afford to take off), closing polling stations in minority neighborhoods and making them vote further away from home, college students not being able to vote where they attend school. What is funny is that the most common way of voter fraud is by absentee ballots but generally, rebulicans vote absentee, so no changes to that. So yeah, this is more than about showing your ID.

The whole emphasis is wrong here. As a nation, we should be encouraging everyone to vote. I've heard all kinds of weird stuff like "people on welfare shouldn't be able to vote cause they will vote themselves benefits". Well everyone "votes themselves benefits". The rich, the poor, veterans, seniors, etc. Everyone who has a stake in the success of this country, which is everyone who lives here, should be allowed to vote at 18. And voting should not be having to jump through a lot of hoops. It should be easy.

As a former poll worker, there is no perfect system that will prevent all fraud. The Voter ID movement is stirring up problems that are non-existent. If you were to poll County District Attorneys in all the states, there might be a 5 or 6 who have found a case or two of fraud. Is that worth all this? Really?

And what is that correct name? You gonna legislate that too? If I have a government photo ID with my photo on it that should stand as one form of identification. If I present a voter registration card and it matches my name on the voter list that should also be good enough to vote. It should not have to match exactly. That's why so many women of a certain age were counseled to keep their maiden names as middle names; it's the one that never changes. You do realize if a woman uses Ann Whitfield on her driver's license and Ann Whitfield Smith on her voter card, she has to jump through more hoops in order to vote in Texas. Shameful,

Umm not complaining but wondering what year? I got divorced in 1980 and since I had a child the judge made me keep my married name to match my daughters last name. I have never remarried. I do, though have two more kids with two different last names than mine. Born 15 and 20 years later. Can't imagine a judge making us all have the same last name these days. However that us what the judge told me in 1980, would cause the child too much confusion??

@repchicksrock You do know that there was a woman judge who had voted for almost 50 years but almost was denied the right to vote because of this new law? There is no voter fraud problem in Texas or the country. The only reason to pass this law is to prevent women from voting. And you do know that women voted overwhelmingly for Obama and Democrats last year!

@jsgolightly@kauaidyes Abortion is not the only issue Hispanics have in the forefront of their minds. There are LOTS of democrats that are devout Catholics. And all of my Hispanic friends are Democrats. So yes, they are anti-abortion. They are still Democrats. The thing about the Democratic party is we are not all rubber-stamped opinion-mongers, we are thinkers. And we are free to take inspiration from both sides of the political isle. What draws people to be a Democrat is varied, but it starts with thinking for ourselves, rather than what we have been told to think, AND wanting to do good for ourselves AND our neighbors. We even want to do good for the Republicans, and the haters.

That is simply not true. I am in Texas my drivers license has my maiden name but voter registration has my middle name, they are not the same. I voted Friday October 31, 2014 with absolutely NO PROBLEM. Unless you think putting my initials in a little box is "jumping thru hoops" You are just flat out wrong.

That is simply not true. I am a woman whose drivers license does have my maiden name and voter registration has my middle name I am in Texas and voted Friday October 31, 2014 with absolutely no problem. Unless you think putting my initials in a little box is jumping thru hoops. You are just flat out wrong!!

@PrintsCharming5@repchicksrock The moral of the story is she should have changed her voter registration card a long long time ago when she got married. End of story. The fact is the state allowed her to vote by signing an affidavit of who she was.

@drudown@repchicksrock -- There is no hinderance. It protects and supports all CITIZEN'S right to vote and helps prevent fraud. If you think it is dangerous to step between a Texas woman and a sale on shoes, think how dangerous it would be to step between one and their right to vote.

The hispanic population is also overwhelmingly in favor of the abortion rights restrictions put in place earlier this year by the Texas Legislature and Gov. Perry. I hate to tell you this, but with the angle the Democrats are pushing, Texas isn't going blue any time soon.

@Pinellas3@deborahy30004 Well that's just the point,isnt it. Folks like you believe only certain type folks should vote. I don't. I believe in Democracy. I believe the more folks that vote, the more representative our electoral process, But you're not really interested is more accurate representation of this great nation, are you. Just more representation of your kind, right?

FYI...there is no law that requires you to use your maiden name as your middle name on your DL.

QUOTE: "She had to sign an affidavit affirming her identity in order to vote
because the last name on her voter registration card, her maiden name,
didn’t match the last name on her license. “This is the first time I
have ever had a problem voting,” she said."

Obviously I have no trouble with comprehension...it clearly states that the last name was different on her voter registration card and her DL. :)

@repchicksrock@PrintsCharming5 She did. Apparently you have a comprehension problem. Her voter registration was in her full name, and her drivers license (as the law required in the year she was married) was her first name, her maiden name as the middle name, and her last name. She did everything the way it was supposed to be done. She obviously hasn't moved, and she had no reason to change her license.

PrintsCharming5 must be one of the younger crowd that thinks everything is everyone's else problem. Heaven forbid he take some responsibility for himself, puts down the cell, gets off the couch and does something for himself without whining that "somebody should do something".

@Libtard@repchicksrock@BRT929 There are barriers because liberals think they shouldn't have to pay for anything and that somebody else should pay for it. The rest of us pay for our ID's and move on.

Impede...nope not here. No one is being impeded. No one is being stopped from voting, it's not made difficult. You know it and I know it... you just won't admit it. Seriously... tell me what is impeding them. You still have yet to do that.

@repchicksrock@Libtard@BRT929 You've got to address why there are even barriers in the first place. You need to accept that the way they've addressed these barriers isn't even a good solution. You need to accept that "impede" is really a great word to describe what's going on here. You need to accept that you're wrong about things sometimes. You probably need to accept a lot of things actually, but I digress and speculate and that's just mean. You actually need to look up "impede" and/or "impediment" and reevaluate your comment.

@Libtard@repchicksrock@BRT929 Oh seriously...impedes. That's more BS. It doesn't impede anyone's right to vote. They have already addressed the barriers to getting an ID. Seriously you guys need to man up!

@repchicksrock@BRT929 no. no no no. nobody's saying "it takes away anyone's right to vote". We're all saying it _impedes_ many people's right to vote. I know you'd like to think that these are minor obstacles to overcome, but for some people, they aren't. Especially if you're completely misinformed about the obstacles, which I'm sure the officials in Texas are trying to ensure.

@BRT929 It doesn't matter if they are or aren't a right guaranteed by the constitution. You still have to show an ID to do any of them.

Of course I understand that there are people who are too poor to have a bank account or own a car. However they have to have an ID to receive any type of govt. assistance. These are the people who not only get free ID's but a bus ticket to get to the DMV.

The bottom line is ....the ID law doesn't take away one's right to vote. That's what I'd like you to explain. Exactly how does this law do that and especially how does this focus on democrats...which is what you guys are saying.

@repchicksrock @Libtard @Cricket0228 @barneydidit Really are you that obtuse? Driving, or buying cigarettes or alcohol, boarding an airplane, opening a bank account, getting into a nightclub, or any of your other suggestions are not fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Believe it or not, there are people too poor to maintain a bank account, or drive a car. The problem with you and most other Republicans is that can't see past your own nose, and you don't care about the consequences to others. As long as it doesn't inconvenience you.

Why don't we do away with absentee ballots? That's really where voter fraud occurs and yet Republicans never consider that one because most Republicans vote absentee.

@repchicksrock@deborahy30004@barneydidit I wish i could be near you, repchick, so I could shake you. You are making a very valid point that you simply need to ACQUIRE a valid ID. But what your people are doing is making it as difficult as possible to ACQUIRE that ID and ensure that it is VALID. That's what's happening. There's a notary who's commented here in this discussion. You should read his/her persepective. It's _clearly_ not cut and dry, end of story, that's that, simple, whatever other words you'd like to use to belittle people who can't get their paperwork in order. These rules are designed to make it as difficult as possible to get your paperwork in order.

@deborahy30004@repchicksrock@barneydidit I didn't "selectively edit" any law. I commented on the story that was told. I never ONCE metioned what the law was or even how the law was upheld or EVEN if it was up to the poll worker. Nope not any part of my statement. Now SLAP your own hand honey!

I merely stated that you can sign an affidavit.

LOLat the shutdown of elections all over the country. You guys are great visionaries...aren't you? And the "hey you don't think the American people see what's going on here" added just the right spice here. Gotta love it!

I think the greater visionary is that you ACQUIRE a valid ID. No more problems!

@repchicksrock@barneydiditFascinating that you selectively edited the law. Its actually up to the poll worker to decide if its close enough, Once that poll worker has decided it is, then a woman has to sign a secondary voter affidavit that is listed in the pollbooks or vote provisionally. Provisional votes in Texas are counted 6 days after the election, which means the vast majority of the time they are not counted for the election has already been called. The secondary voter affidavit and the pollbook are great methods for someone to contest any election where they don't like the results. Just contest based on the pollbook. Hey, you don't think the American people see what's going on here? The gridlock in Washington is nothing compared to the shutdowns potential if elections all over the country were tied up in court.

@Libtard@repchicksrock@Cricket0228@barneydidit It is whining with a capital W. Sorry but you have to have an ID for lots of other things...buying cigarettes or booze, drive a car, board an airplane, open a bank account, get into a R rated movie or a nightclub, purchase a car, a house and even to get electricity to heat or cool the house, or even to rent an apartment You need an ID to get welfare, medicaid or any other government assistance program.

You are suggesting that we shouldn't need to show an ID when we vote for the person who is running our country?

@repchicksrock@Cricket0228@barneydidit very well formed response, chicksrock. You know you're simply defending trickery and obfuscation, right? Nobody here is crying. People here are crying foul because they're being made to unneccesarily prove they are who they are when they never had to in the past. And it's because the GOP keeps losing...so instead of trying to become a better option for more people, they're changing as much law as they can to game the system. It is NO coincidence that voter ID laws target democratic voters. You guys can't really get out the vote, so you want to make sure the vote simply can't get out.

A typical liberal......Waaaaaa you want me to stand in line and get a free valid ID. Who's gonna pay for the gas to get me there and my time off work and the wear and tear on my car. And then who will pay for my anger management classes I'll need after being frustrated because I had to stand in a line and take a damn number. Waaa waaa waaa I am special...I shouldn't have to wait for anything or anyone. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

@BecciHimes You seem to have some confusion as to what a check is... or you're on some kind of 'Do Not Allow' check writing list with your local stores. Voter fraud, check-writing fraud, might wanna get that sorted out.

@repchicksrock@Libtard@drudown"Joyce Block, according to the ACLU of Pennsylvania’s website, had
never driven and didn’t have a state-issued ID, but when she went to
get an ID in 2012 she was told she couldn’t because her birth
certificate and her Social Security card were in her maiden name. The
only official document she had with her married name on it was her ketubah,
the marriage certificate she had received during her traditional Jewish
wedding ceremony. Because it was written in Hebrew, a DMV official
couldn’t verify it."

You deceptively imply that the mere State Action of making voting more onerous doesn't have to advance a COMPELLING STATE INTEREST insofar that it affects Due Process rights of the People. Sorry, that is just nonsense.It is well established that “the Due Process Clause was intended to secure an individual from an abuse of power by government officials.” Daniels v. Williams (1986) 474 U.S. 327. Here, making the mere act of voting unduly burdensome constitutes an abuse of power by the State.